At 11:23 17/09/02 -0400, you wrote: <<<< What appears to be happening in Canada is politics increasingly based on regional interests. Ideology or principles really don't seem to matter very much anymore. The dominant Liberal Party has moved leftward and rightward and stolen much of the thunder of both the socialists and the conservatives. However, the west and the east are very suspicious of central Canada and Quebec remains deeply suspicious of everybody. >>>>
I'm not surprised, given the geographical and climatological differences between the east and west. But it's more than that, of course. Now that Scotland and Wales have achieved a certain measure of autonomy, devolution is now becoming strong in England, too, even though we're all within spitting distance of one another. The south-west (Devon and Cornwall), the north-east (Yorkshire and Northumberland) particularly want to break away from the domination of London and the south-east. (Or, rather, their politicians and business people do. When opinion polls ask the people, they're only mildly in favour and say that they don't really want yet another layer of government. Election turnouts for the Welsh Assembly and the Scottish Parliament are hardly better than normal general elections.) It's a long lingering death and politicians (in England, anyway) have only recently woken up to it with some alarm. As to be expected, politicians are interpreting the trend in a superficial way -- such as how to minimise the actual physical effort of walking/driving to the polling booth on election day, or re-arranging the hours which Parliament sits. So they've been experimenting with postal voting, Internet voting, phone voting and so on. Nothing promising has turned up, of course. Politicians haven't tackled the main problem -- how to marry the increased complexity of life with participation from the public *as and when they need to and feel inclined to*. Let me give one particular example that's right outside my front door. This is a genteel street of Georgian house that is very narrow because it was constructed 200 years ago for the pony-and-trap. But it's become a "rat-run" in recent years, taking off a great deal of heavy commuter traffic from the London Road which runs half-a-mile below us in parallel. The result has been a large number of road accidents. I've had cars bounce off my front garden walls twice in the last ten years. Despite representations to the elected politicians of Bath council over the years, nothing has been done. However, a residents' association (of about 500 people) was formed some years ago and a small committee of five or six studied the problem and consulted residents. (It might also be said that we are apathetic in the sense that we rarely attend meetings of the association -- but we know those whom we've elected to our committee and we have complete confidence in them [neither do they badger us like polticians].) The result of this is that the residents' committee have become experts in traffic problems and, as such, have been able to bypass the politicians and consult with the road traffic officials not only at city level but also at regional level. Gradually, a whole series of safety measures (e.g. bollards along the pavements) and traffic-calming changes such as speed humps and so forth are being brought in. Average speeds have been brought down from about 60-70 m.p.h to about 50 m.p.h. with further plans agreed that will bring speeds down (we hope!) to 30 m.p.h. with more traffic routed away from us. Now that's an example of what I've been calling "Policy Forums" on this list. Our road is slightly exceptional in that we have a number of very able people living along here. But, nevertheless, our committee was by no means expert in traffic problems before it started, but its members have become so -- so expert, in fact, that they were able to dispute, converse, consult with the professionals, and then able to suggest and bring about constructive solutions. I think that what we're seeing emerging (very slowly) is this new sort of pattern of government more widely. In all developed countries, we have been seeing a huge growth in special interest groups in recent decades. But, at present, these are usually situated centrally and, as yet, the groups are not usually very democratic. Nevertheless, this is the pattern which is taking shape. I feel that what politicians ought to be doing now is to admit that they themselves (and, often, their civil service departments) cannot cope any longer with the whole bag of complexity that faces them. They should recognise this new process and ease it along with appropriate devolution and appropriate channels of ad hoc, but definitely democratic, representation for each of the many complex issues that now arise. "One-shop" type of centralised government doesn't work any more and, what's more, an increasing proportion of the population knows it, doesn't vote for it any longer and increasingly views politicians with either apathy (particularly among the young) or contempt. I could go on, but that's enough. It's my bed-time now. Keith ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- Keith Hudson,6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England Tel:01225 312622/444881; Fax:01225 447727; E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ________________________________________________________________________
